Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1993 British Isles Championship

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge to Triple Crown Tournament . -- RoySmith (talk) 15:26, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

1993 British Isles Championship

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

These kind of leagues are not notable as no notable cricketer is playing in the league. Following seasons can't establish notability so I nominate them for deletion. Greenbörg (talk) 14:52, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 14:59, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 14:59, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 14:59, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages:

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:53, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:53, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:53, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all per nom. Jack | ^{talk page} 16:27, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The notability of the players taking part (and there are a number of notable players who have appeared in some of the games e.g. Ian Stanger,George Salmond,Gavin Hamilton,Ed Joyce,Kyle McCallan) is not important, as WP:NOTINHERIT. Important thing is if there are sources available that show that the tournaments were considered notable in their own right. The main source seems to be Cricket Europe, but that is not enough for me. I'd merge the lot into Triple Crown Tournament Spike 'em (talk) 20:20, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

All the players in this 1993 match have played first-class and List-A cricket, and in some cases ODIs. Spike 'em (talk) 21:39, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all the league isn't first-class or List A matches, so we don't need articles for every season. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:50, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Triple Crown Tournament per Spike 'em. These competitions played a role in the development of cricket in Ireland and Scotland, and a level of coverage would be suitable, but definitely not as detailed as currently present. Harrias ^talk 12:37, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nom. Articles not notable, and not apparently useful. Elliot321 (talk) 16:52, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge all into Triple Crown Tournament per Spike 'em. All of these articles are short, including the Triple Crown Tournament parent article, and while these tournaments maybe not be notable as individual tournaments, the content should be merged into the parent article, which is not up for AFD.---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 05:24, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge all into Triple Crown Tournament - agree with Spike'em and Patar's points. LAroboGuy (talk) 16:53, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Are we merging or are we deleting?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 20:41, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment just a comment because I am ignorant of the subject, but I do not see that any of the delete comments give a reason why merge is not suitable. DGG ( talk ) 00:05, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I will be happy with merge. Greenbörg (talk) 06:01, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.